My final post on this since I believe we're going way off-topic here:
Agreed. The question I think they're asking is "how can we do this
better?" The point of the article(s) is that the resources need to be
pulled together (not scattered around) and well-documented if the
solutions are to appeal broadly to the average user (and not only to
a certain kind of particularly tech-savvy user). My point in posting
the article at all (and perhaps inadvertently pulling us way off-
topic :-) ) was to suggest that perhaps the Apple approach - in terms
of cost and the level of independence it promotes (and I'm talking
specifically about blind access here) - is an example worth examining
closely. It might be *the* model - the new gold standard (though,
ironically, we've spent a good deal of time trying to figure out how
to rebut reviews bashing the Apple effort). Anyway, *grin* my guess
is that this discussion is turning theoretical in a bad way and we
risk alienating folks on the list who have more pressing concerns.
Joe
On Mar 20, 2006, at 2:18 PM, Travis Siegel wrote:
I'm a little puzzled at the statement in this article that claims
disabled users don't like opensource.
Who are they kidding?
I *love* opensource.
Although it doesn't happen often, opensource gives us the ability
(even if it isn't exercised often) to *make* a product accessible
(the dvd player I just released is an example of this, though it
wasn't opensource, it was an apple demo project) Without
opensource, some accessibility initiaves wouldn't even exist (the
one recently rheavily discussed here is the brltty project) There's
of cours others, and I freely admit there's nowhere near as many
blind programmers as there shold be working on os software making
it accessible, but the point is that we *can* work to make it
accessible, and we can do it ourselves. Try doing that with a
microsoft product, and see how far you get.
I have no doubt these two users were saying what they conceived to
be the truth, but I submit that perhaps they haven't been looking
at or using opensource software long enough to be used as
authoratative sources on this topic.
On Mar 20, 2006, at 12:06 PM, Kafka's Daytime wrote:
